No Contracts for America: 7 gay marriage bans strike at straights, too

[MonteSano]

If you want a taste of the dazzling innovation emerging from state-level politics this electoral season, take a look at the eight anti-gay marriage amendments heading for a vote in November. In each of these states—Arizona, Colorado, Idaho, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Virginia and Wisconsin—gay marriage is already illegal. The idea du jour from the party of ideas? Make it more illegal, enshrining in the constitution restrictions spelled out in statute. If that sounds insufficiently redundant, consider that it's not as if Adam and Steve were placing tiered-cake orders in any of those states before the original bans were passed.

Amendments, say marriage-banners, are the last defense of a helpless electorate against the dread "activist judge," a loony leftist bogeyman unlikely to be manning the bench in, say, Tennessee. Because the amendments have been written with latte-sipping, hair-splitting judges in mind, they tend to be more expansive than the 19 constitutional amendments that have passed in other states. All but Tennessee's would affect any and all domestic partnerships, a hit at legal unions as well as full-on marriage, straight couples as well as gay. Virginia's amendment, which will most likely pass come November, states:

This Commonwealth and its political subdivisions shall not create or recognize a legal status for relationships of unmarried individuals that intends to approximate the design, qualities, significance, or effects of marriage. Nor shall this Commonwealth or its political subdivisions create or recognize another union, partnership, or other legal status to which is assigned the rights, benefits, obligations, qualities, or effects of marriage.

Anti-amendment activists in Arizona and Virginia have seized on the implications for straights, stressing that a broad sweep of the anti-gay brush will wipe away their rights as well. Campaign materials for the Commonwealth Coalition, a group formed to oppose the Virginia amendment, focus on the measure's "unprecedented sweep and its potential to endanger ALL unmarried couples." And in a widely cited analysis, the law firm of Arnold & Porter has said the amendment could be used to invalidate protections for straight couples under domestic violence laws, prevent private employers from offering benefits to domestic partners, and prevent the courts from enforcing private agreements between unmarried couples.


http://www.reason.com/links/links102006.shtml

[China_cat]

1. But that's the beauty of that wording

In one fell swoop they also get to punish those awful people of opposite gender who live together and actually have SEX without being married.

[Freedom_from_Chains]

2. And next up will be co-habitation agreements

before long all sex outside of the union of marriage will be adultery and illegal. We just got to put a stop to all this sinning going on out there.

[HockeyMom]

3. St. Rudy of 9/11

If Adultery Laws were on the books and enforced, the "Country's Mayor" would have been serving jail time on 9/11.

[Freedom_from_Chains]

5. Naw, in that instance he was just misguided

all we have to do is have everyone in the country pray for Rudy and everything will be O.K After all, Rudy is a Republican and everyone knows that only Democrats sin.

[mark414]

4. it seems like it might not pass in wisconsin

i haven't seen any recent polls but in the last one the yes/no were just about neck and neck...although our incumbent Dem gov has just taken a big lead in the most recent poll, so hopefully there'll be enough people voting for him that'll do the right thing. christ it's sad that i have to hope for something like that.